
.fit! 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 





011 697 470 8 



Hollingei 

pH S.5 

Mill Run F03-2193 



E 195 
.R47 
Copy 1 






The British Ministry and the Treaty of 
Fort Stanwix 

Bv Clarence Walworth Alvord, Ph.D. 



[From the Proceedings of the State Historical Society of" 

Wi^eonsin for 1908, pages 165-18}] 



Madison 

Published bv rhe Society 

1909 



The British Ministry and the 
Treaty of Fort Stanwix 1 

By Clarence Walworth Alvord, Ph. D. 

In the seventh decade of the eighteenth century a newspaper 
contributor in Great Britain wrote the following concerning the 
rapid succession of ministries that had attempted the govern- 
ment of the country during the early years of the reign of 
George III: 3 

The variety of persons, who within a very short compass of years, 
have been produced to the public in the first employments of the state, 
hath diverted our attention from a more important object; from the 
measures they have pursued or meant to pursue. Amused and deluded 
by a succession of illustrious names, we have hardly had time to con- 
sider their different systems of administration, and have been more 
anxious to know by whom employments were filled, than how they 
were executed. 

To the present-day student of the period, the same difficulty 
presents itself under a similar guise ; for the kaleidoscopic 
changes in the British ministry during the middle of the 
eighteenth century renders the tracing of the' ministerial de- 



1 It is the expectation of the writer to publish, in the near future, 
a more complete treatment of his conclusions concerning the Western 
policy of the British ministry than is contained in the following pages. 
For this reason, and on account of the shortness of time before the 
manuscript was to be sent to the press, it seemed sufficient to indicate 
the conclusions without setting forth the complete line of argument; 
although reference has been made to the principal sources for the 
interpretation herein maintained. 

"Almon, A New and Impartial Collection of Interesting Letters from 
the Public Papers — Sept., 1760 to May, 1767, vol. ii, p. 218. Letter from 
Vindex. 

[165] 



Wisconsin Historical Society 

velopment interesting, while it has made difficult the discovery 
of the principles of policy. Instead of several distinct parties 
with definite platforms, such as is characteristic of the present 
politics of Great Britain, there were in the middle of the 
eighteenth century many groups of men around their several 
leaders, whose chief object was office-holding. To accomplish 
this end the various groups were willing to make combinations 
with almost no consideration of conflicting policies. In fact, 
one of the prevailing theories of government justified such non- 
partisan ministries, by preaching the need of harmony between 
king and parliament, which could' never be maintained by the 
predominance of either, as had been the case in former years. 

Arbitrary absolutism under the Stuarts, and party govern- 
ment under the supremacy of the Old Whig nobility, had both 
been tried. Harmony could be obtained, it was thought, by a 
ministry composed of all factions working in union with the 
king. This theory made acceptable to many politicians of that 
period the hybrid ministry, composed of opposing groups, which 
the Earl of Chatham brought together in 1766, and that not 
less curious combination of 1768 under the Duke of Grafton. 8 

It would be a hopeless task to seek for ministerial policies in 
such a jumble of factions, were the groups and sub-groups of 
politicians, with their personal biases, not easily distinguishable ; 
and if the hostility of certain groups to each other did not ren- 
der combination difficult, if not impossible. Thus among the 
various factions, such as George Grenville's, the Duke of Bed- 
ford's, the Duke of Newcastle's, the Earl of Bute's, the Marquis 
of Rockingham's, and William Pitt's, with the sub-groups led 
by Lord Shelburne and Conway, we find that certain of these 
would not act with others. In spite of attempts at reconcilia- 
tion, the Rockinghams would not join with the Grenvilles, and 
the Bedfords always objected to Conway and Shelburne. It 
is out of such slight indications that we must draw an interpre- 
tation of the policy favored by any given ministry. This is the 
purpose of the present paper, wherein it is attempted to trace 
the Western policy of the ministry from the' autumn of 1763 to 
the autumn of 1768. 



8 Ruville, William Pitt, Earl of Chatham (New York, 1907), iii, p. 9. 

[166] 



British Western Policy 



The period which has been selected begins with a definite act 
on the part of the ministry ; namely, the proclamation of 1763, 
wherein is formulated for the first time the policy proposed to 
be followed towards the West. The intermediate time is one of 
constantly changing or inchoate ministries, when the West as 
such received very slight attention, so that it is most difficult to 
determine what was the attitude of the ministerial party at any 
given time. The period ends with the treaty of Fort Stanwix, 
in 1768, which is the first definitive action taken after the proc- 
lamation. Our subject narrows itself down, therefore, to trac- 
ing the relation between these two acts, the Proclamation of 
1763 and the Treaty of Fort Stanwix. 

It was, my pleasure a year ago to read a paper on the 
"Genesis of the Proclamation of 1763" before the Michigan 
Pioneer and Historical Society. 4 The limited time for this 
paper forbids a reproduction of the arguments advanced at that 
time ; but for my present purpose it is necessary that I should 
review very briefly some of my conclusions. The management 
of Indian affairs during the previous years had been so badly 
conducted by the several colonies, that the natives were being 
continually exasperated', until they broke out in the uprising 
known in history as Pontiac's War. 

The particular grievances of the Indians were', the irregular 
practices of the traders, and the illegal encroachments on their 
lands by the colonists. After a careful examination of the con- 
ditions, the British ministry determined that the only means of 
maintaining justice in their relation with the native tribes, was 
to centralize the management directly under the imperial gov- 
ernment. This was the purpose of the proclamation. The 
policy formulated at that time, as far as it interests the argu- 
ment of this paper, may be divided under the following head- 
ings: 

First. There should be established a boundary between the lands 
that may be settled by white men and those reserved for the Indiana, 



* Printed in Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections (Lansing, 
1908), xxxvi. 

The Treaty of Fort Stanwix was but one of a series of Indian treaties, 
which mark the definite step in the development of the Western 
policy, to which reference is made. 

[167] 



Wisconsin Historical Society 

Second. The land reserved for the Indians should be opened up for 
future colonization only through purchase by the crown. 

Third. Regulations for the Indian trade should be made in the 
future. 

Two of these subjects require some further notice. On ac- 
count of the outbreak of Pontiac's War, the ministry felt the 
necessity of determining immediately a temporary boundary 
line in order to reassure the Indians. Therefore, the line of the 
Appalachian divide was chosen ; but this was to be replaced, as 
soon as peace with the Indians was secured, by a line farther 
to the westward, which should include the already partially- 
settled lands of the upper Ohio region. The neglect to do this, 
was the cause of many disturbances on the frontier, caused by 
speculators and settlers pushing westward in anticipation of the 
ministerial action. 

The ministerial policy in regard to future settlements beyond' 
this Indian boundary line, is not so easy to determine. Lord 
Shelburne was responsible for the wording of these passages 
concerning Indian affairs, and there can be no doubt but that 
he, like his friend Benjamin Franklin, anticipated a time when 
colonies would be planted as far west as the Mississippi. As 
far as our scanty evidence shows, his colleagues agreed with him 
in this ; but this subject became, in the period under considera- 
tion, the one concerning which there was the greatest disagree- 
ment among the ministers. Should the policy of westward ex- 
pansion be decided' upon, it would be necessary to establish 
western boundaries for several colonies, such as Virginia, the 
Carolinas, and Georgia, which claimed the West on account 
of their sea-to-sea charters, and any action directed to that end 
was likely to arouse protests from the Americans. This policy 
was frequently contemplated, and at times apparently adopted, 
by the ministry; but positive and final action was deferred till 
the outbreak of the Revolutionary War, which brought all nego- 
tiations to an end. 5 



5 For the history of the proposed colony of Vandalia, to which refer- 
ence is made, see Alden, "New Governments West of the Alleghaniea 
before 1180 (Madison, 1897), pp. 19 et seq. 



[ 168 



British Western Policy 

After the resignation of Lord Shelburne from the presidency 
of the Board of Trade, 6 in early September, 1763, his place was 
filled by Lord Hillsborough, who enjoyed the favor of the Bedford 
faction. The new president had had no experience in colonial 
affairs, and, since the situation on the frontiers was critical, he 
adopted the proclamation already partially written by Lord 
Shelburne ; and this was issued on October 7, 1763. The policy 
announced at this time remained', practically unchanged, as the 
ministerial policy for over four years. Before 1768, Lord Hills- 
borough did not, except in minor details, oppose the plan for 
the "West formulated by his predecessor. This is true also of 
those who succeeded him as president of the Board of Trade, 
and of those who held the more important position of secretary 



6 For a discussion of the Board of Trade, see Kellogg, "The American 
Colonial Charter," in American Historical Association Report, 1903 
(Washington 1904), pp. 214 et seq. The administration of colonial 
affairs was complicated by the exercise of power by both the secretary 
of state for the Southern department and the Board of Trade, who 
were not always in agreement concerning policies. During the period 
under discussion three methods of unifying the administration were 
tried. From 1757 to 1766, the president of the Board of Trade was 
generally given a seat in the ministry, where he could defend the 
recommendations of himself and his colleagues. In July, 1766, at the 
coming into power of the Chatham ministry, the Board of Trade gave 
up all its executive functions to the secretary of state for the Southern 
department, so that one man became responsible for all colonial pol- 
icies. In January, 1768, another step was taken towards unification, 
when the new secretaryship of state for the colonies was created. 
Shortly after that, this secretary became president of the Board of 
Trade also. — Smyth, Life and Writings of Ben]. Franklin (N. Y., 1905), 
v., pp. 147, 149. Throughout the period the members of the Board of 
Trade appear generally willing to follow the lead of their president or 
of the secretary of state, and at no time does there appear much 
initiative among the subordinate members, although a close study of 
the personnel of the Board of Trade is necessary, before accepting ex- 
clusively this view. See Grenville Papers (London, 1852-53), ii, pp. 
219, 246, iii, pp. 73, 81; Walpole, Memoirs of George III (New York, 
1894), ii, p. 236. 

Shelburne resigned at this time because of the failure of the negotia- 
tions to secure the co-operation of Pitt. — Chatham Correspondence (Lon- 
don, 1838), ii, pp. 241, 245. 

[169] 



Wisconsin Historical Society 

of state for the Southern department, the office that had general 
charge of colonial affairs. 

The principal duty in regard to Western affairs that remained' 
for Lord Hillsborough, was to carry out two lines of policy that 
had already been determined. These were to draw up the 
regulations for the Indian trade, and to establish by treaty 
with the Indians the boundary line west of the Alleghanies. 
On account of the unsettled condition of the Indians due to 
the war, Lord Hillsborough was unable, before he was super- 
seded, to take up this latter subject, although he kept it con- 
stantly in mind. The new president of the Board of Trade 
undertook, however, to work out the regulations of trade. In 
this he was ably assisted by the Indian agent, Sir William 
Johnson, and others, who kept up a continuous correspondence 
with him concerning the subject. 7 

The result of these efforts, was a plan for the future manage- 
ment of the Indian trade, that was submitted to Johnson and 
others for criticism on July 10, 1764. 8 The plan contemplated 
the complete centralization of Indian affairs. The represen- 
tatives of the British government were to be two superintend- 
ents, one for the Northern department and one for the South- 
ern, under each of whom were deputy agents, commissaries, and 
other minor officials. All relations with the Indians were to be 
conducted through these officers. For the maintenance of jus- 
tice among the traders and Indians, the deputy agents and com- 
missaries were, in civil and criminal cases, to be granted the 
judicial power of justices of the peace ; and the right of appeal 
to the superintendents, in major cases, was reserved to all 
pleaders in the courts. Trade was to be permitted' only at d33- 
ignated posts, where commissaries were to be stationed. That 
the Lords of Trade had in mind the prevention of some of the 
evils from which the Indian trade had suffered under the pre- 
vious management of the colonies, is shown by the articles pro- 
hibiting the sale of liquors to the Indians and the one fixing the 
price of goods. The last articles dealt with the boundary which 
was still to be established, and prove that the Board of Trade 
intended to follow the policy of Shelburne in this matter. 



7 See correspondence in N. Y. Colon. Docs. (Albany, 1856), vii. 

8 Printed in Ibid., pp. 637 et seq. 

[170] 



British Western Policy 

This plan for the management of trade was, in the course of 
time, submitted to many persons for criticism. Sir "William 
Johnson approved the spirit of the plan, and criticised only a 
few articles. His acceptance of the plan as a whole might have 
been anticipated, as the Board of Trade had followed' almost ex- 
clusively the recommendations which he had made during the 
past years. 9 The criticisms of Lieutenant Governor Colden of 
New York and those of Colonel Bradstreet were also distinctly 
favorable. 10 A few years later Lord Shelburne asked Benjamin 
Franklin for his opinion. He answered: "The regulations 
in this plan seem to me in general very good." He then pro- 
ceeded to make a few criticisms of several details, such as fixing 
prices and the prohibition of the sale of liquor. 11 

The Grenville ministry adopted the plan, but since the main- 
tenance of the proposed establishment would be expensive, and 
the principle of the ministry was economy, it was proposed by 
the Lords of Trade to lay a tax on the Indian trade for the sup- 
port of the Indian government. This required an act of parlia- 
ment, but the subject was never pushed; and later the outcry 
of the colonists against the stamp act made such action appear 
inexpedient. 12 

In July, 1765, the Grenvilles yielded to the Rockingham 
ministry. This was the only true party ministry of the period. 
It was composed of representatives of the old line "Whigs, who 
were distinctly favorable to the American colonies. The atten- 
tion of the ministry during its year of life was so occupied with 
undoing the acts of its predecessor, such as the stamp act, 
the cider act, etc., that the question of the West never be- 
came a live issue. That the ministry was in favor of a liberal 
policy, is proved by the offer of the presidency of the Board of 
Trade to Lord Shelburne, but this he refused. 13 Conway became 
secretary of state for the Southern department; after Shel- 
burne 's refusal, the presidency of the Board of Trade was given 
to Lord Dartmouth ; and the personnel of the board was taken 



• Johnson to Lords of Trade, Oct. 8, 1764, IUd, p. 661. 
"Colden to Lords of Trade, Oct. 12, 1764 and Bradstreet to Lords of 
Trade, Dec. 4, 1764, IUd, pp. 667, 690. 
11 Smyth, Life and Writings of Franklin, Iv, p. 467. 
a N. Y. Colon. Docs., vii, pp. 634, 964. 
"Rockingham Memoirs (London, 1852), I, p. 234. 

[171] 



Wisconsin Historical Society 

over from the previous ministry almost without change. 14 Al- 
though there is no act of these men during this year to indicate 
their attitude toward the West, their later acts and letters show 
that they were ready to accept the policy that had been so ably 
formulated by Lord Shelburne in the Proclamation of 1763. 
This is as much as can be said concerning the Western policy 
of the Kockingham ministry. 

In July, 1766, the newly-created Earl of Chatham came into 
office again and formed' his "broad bottom ministry," which 
included representatives from as many factions as was possible. 
Chatham brought into the ministry only four of his immediate 
followers, among whom was Shelburne. He was made secretary 
of state for the Southern department, and was granted liberty 
to carry out his American policy. 

It is surprising to find Lord Hillsborough accepting the 
position of president of the Board of Trade under Shelburne. 
In a letter 15 to George Grenville, Hillsborough explained that 
the' position as it was offered to him by the minister carried 
with it a seat in the cabinet; but that he refused the presi- 
dency unless the board' was made a committee for report only, 
and was relieved of all the executive functions that had been 
acquired during the last decade. The letter contains many in- 
sinuations against an unnamed person, who can only be Lord 
Shelburne ; but the fact remains that Shelburne made the offer, 
and Hillsborough accepted the post on condition that Shel- 
burne assume all executive duties, and thus have a free hand 
to carry out his American policy. Hillsborough did this in 
the year 1766 — Hillsborough, who has been regarded as a con- 
stant opponent of the expansion of the colonies westward. 

The explanation is to be found in the fact that since the 
year 1763, the question of the West had not been a live issue, 
and that while Hillsborough was president of the Board of 
Trade, he had shown his willingness to carry out Shelburne 's 
policy, as far as action was needed at the time. In 1766, 
therefore, there was no means for either to know that they would 
differ radically when the West should again enter the horizon 
of ministerial policy. As far as the trouble in the seaboard 



" Grenville Papers, iil, pp. 73, 254. 
11 IMd, p. 294. 

[172] 



British Western Policy 

colonies was concerned, it is apparent that Hillsborough was 
nailing to give Shelburne every opportunity. 16 Within two 
years the two men were to discover that they differed on many 
questions; but before that time, Hillsborough had resigned his 
subordinate position in order to enter upon other duties. This 
occurred in December, 1766. Lord Clare accepted his place on 
the Board of Trade, and he also appears to have been ready 
to follow rather than to lead. 17 

Never was there a weaker ministry than this one of the Earl 
of Chatham's. Before the end of the year, Chatham himself 
withdrew, on account of illness, from active participation in af- 
fairs, and left to Grafton and Conway the guidance of the 
ministry. But his deputies constantly feared to assume re- 
sponsibility for action without consulting their chief, who al- 
most as constantly denied them access to his presence. 18 Shel- 
burne was not on friendly terms with his colleagues, was fre- 
quently absent from meetings, and would have willingly re- 
signed had he not regarded himself as Chatham's personal 
representative. 19 It was hardly to be expected that definitive 
action would come from such a jellyfish body; yet it was this 
ministry that was to take the first step toward the completion 
of the policy of 1763. 

You will recall that I grouped this policy under three head- 
ings : first, the establishment of an Indian boundary line west 
of the Alleghanies; second, the purchase of territory west of 
this line for the purpose of colonization ; and third, the an- 
nouncement of regulations for the Indian trade. Nothing had 
been done towards carrying out any of these provisions. It is 
not surprising, therefore', that the father of the policy, Lord 
Shelburne, should urge the ministry to action. 



"That Hillsborough was at this time regarded as a supporter of the 
Chatham policies is proved by the letters exchanged by Chatham and 
Shelburne, when it was proposed to offer the Spanish mission to Hills- 
borough. Chatham is surprised at the proposal which meant "unfixing 
the most critical office in the kingdom so happily fixed through and by 
my channel." — Chatham Correspondence, iii, pp. 114, 115, 121. 

" Rockingham Memoirs, i, p. 78. 

"Memoirs of Duke of Grafton (London, 1898), pp. 109 et seq. 

*• Fitzmaurice, Life of Shelburne (London, 1876), ii, pp. 59 et seq. 

[173] 



Wisconsin Historical Society 

Before following Shelburne 's career, it will be necessary to 
take a hasty glance at affairs in America, so that we may 
follow the sequence of events. Since 1763 settlers had been 
crowding across the mountains, which were still the boundary 
line, and settling in the upper Ohio valley. 20 The settlement 
at Pittsburg was already called a town, and' pioneers were find- 
ing their way down the river in the search of fertile fields, thus 
invading territory where the Indian titles had not yet been 
purchased by the crown. Although the ministry had fully in- 
tended that this territory should be opened for settlement, the 
delay in establishing the proposed boundary line made the 
action of the frontiersmen distinctly illegal, and contrary to 
solemn pledges given to the Indians. In spite of the exer- 
tions of Sir William Johnson, and because of the failure to 
proclaim the needed regulations of the trade, the Indians were 
as systematically and regularly cheated as under the former 
rule of the colonies. 21 For both these causes Indian outbreaks 
occurred, settlers and traders were killed, and a general Indian 
war was imminent, so that it was time that the ministry should 
act. 

At the same time pressure was being brought by Americans 
upon the ministry, to fulfill the implied policy of the famous 
proclamation and to open up to colonization wide stretches of 
land west of the proposed boundary. As early as 1762, Gen- 
eral Amherst urged the erection of a colony around Detroit. 23 
In the spring of 1763 some Virginians, among whom the 
Washingtons and' Lees were conspicuous, formed the Missis- 
sippi Company for the purpose of establishing a settlement on 
that great Western river. George Croghan wrote from London, 
in 1764, that there was talk of a colony in the Illinois country, 



20 The correspondence of the period is full of this westward move- 
ment. The most accessible collection of letters is in O'Callaghan, 
Documentary History of New York, ii, pp. 881 et seq. See also Wash- 
ington's Journal in Ford, Writings of George Washington (New York, 
1889), ii, pp. 289 et seq. 

*N. Y. Colon. Docs., vii, p. 960. This reference is to a very able re- 
view of the Indian relations by Sir William Johnson, written to Lord 
Shelburne, Sept. 22, 1767. 

22 Shelburne MSS., in Historical Manuscripts Commission Report, v. 
1876 (London, 1876), p. 217. 

[174] 



British Western Policy 

and that he was recommending to the ministry such an under- 
taking. At about the same time General Lyman went to Lon- 
don to promote his scheme of a settlement on the lower Missis- 
sippi. In 1766 some Philadelphia merchants, having learned 
of the possibility of a colony in the Illinois, associated with 
themselves Governor Franklin and Sir William Johnson in a 
company to take up a large tract of land in that region. 
Benjamin Franklin was made a member of the company, and 
was appointed its representative in London, where it might be 
expected that his friendship with Lord Shelburne would give 
him an advantage over his competitors for ministerial favors. 2 * 

Moved by the petitions and letters of these interested parties, 
Lord Shelburne began in the fall of 1767 to put into execu- 
tion his comprehensive plan for the West. The first subject to 
receive his attention was that of the boundary line', concerning 
which he had received letters from General Gage, Sir William 
Johnson, and others. How unimportant this whole subject 
had been deemed by the ministry during the last few years, is 
shown by the fact that the letters from the Indian superin- 
tendents, announcing that arrangements were already made 
with the Indians to cede ,the required' territory, had been mis- 
laid ; and it was only after diligent search that they were 
found. 24 

The actual urgency of the case, for an Indian war was 
threatening, compelled the Board of Trade, on December 23, 
1767, to agree with Shelburne in recommending that the line 
should immediately be established; and orders were sent to 
America to that effect. 25 By a series of treaties— the one at 
Fort Stanwix with the Iroquois, and that of Lochabar, in 1770, 
with the Southern Indians, being the most important — a con- 
tinuous boundary line was run from the Great Lakes, back of 
the Appalachians, around the coast of Florida, and through 
the southern part of the East and West Floridas, almost to the 



23 For the substance of this whole paragraph see Alden, New Govern- 
ments. The subject of these land projects has been ably worked up 
by Dr. C. E. Carter of Illinois College, who expects shortly to make 
public the results of his research. The conclusions which he has 
reached will change several traditional views of the subject. 

34 Smyth, Writings of Franklin, v, pp. 67, 68, 113. 

U N. Y. Colon. Docs., vii, p. 1004. 

[175] 



Wisconsin, Historical Society 

Mississippi River. 26 Thus, in accordance with the policy in- 
tended at the time of the Proclamation of 1763, a large extent 
of territory was opened up to immediate settlement, the most 
important part of which lay south of the Ohio and extended 
westward to the Great Kanawha. 

To understand Shelburne's plans for Indian management 
and the erection of colonies within the Indian reservation, the 
financial situation in England must be kept in mind. The 
ministry had been greatly embarrassed by the success of the 
opposition in cutting down the British land tax from four to 
three shillings in the pound. The consequence of this was, a 
demand upon all departments for economy, and a desire to 
find revenue from other sources. Charles Townshend, the 
chancellor of the exchequer, proposed to the' ministry his 
famous duties on imports into the American colonies, in order 
to compensate somewhat for this loss of income. 

This proposal called' from Shelburne a letter to Chatham, 
dated February 1, 1767, in which he briefly outlined his plans 
for raising a revenue in America. "I have always thought," 
he wrote, "the quit rents may be so managed, without having 
too great a retrospect, as to produce a certain sum: and I have 
likewise' had reason to think that such a new method of grant- 
ing lands might be devised, under the direction of my Lord 
President, as might give infinite satisfaction to America, con- 
tribute to the ascertaining property, preventing future suits 
at law, and in great measure prevent the Indian disturbances, 
and besides all, incidentally produce a certain revenue, with- 
out its being the object." 27 During the summer, these ideas as- 
sumed more concrete form, and led to direct proposals. His 
plan and reasons are set forth in the following quotable words 
in a letter to General Gage on November 14, 1767 : 28 

The enormous expence attending the present method of employing 
the Troops cantoned in the back settlements and frontier posts of 



26 For a full discussion and his map of the line see Farrand, "The 
Indian Boundary Line," in Amer. Hist. Rev., x, No. 4. See also the 
map herewith published, in the preparation of which I have had the 
co-operation of both Prof. F. J. Turner and the Editor of the present 
volume, Dr. Thwaites. 

27 Chatham Correspondence, ill, p. 185. 

** Sparks MSB., in Harvard University Library, xlii, vol. 3, p. 120. 

[ 176] 




Line of the falls of the "Rivers 
—•-"-' line of the proclamation of 1763 
«** Indian boundary line m 1770 
• •• Line not completed. 
a«h» lochabar treaty line (donelson. 177 i ) . .- "' 

[Based in part on map by Farrand, in American Historical Review, 

x, No. 4] 



British Western Policy 



North America with the heavy contingent charges arising from the 
transportation of Stores, and the danger to which the discipline of the 
army is exposed to by the regiments being broken into small detach- 
ments, have all been very often and very justly represented in your 
letters. To remedy these evils no measure seems to bid fairer than 
one, which by establishing Governments where provisions and neces- 
saries may be furnished on the spot, will render half the posts now 
kept up unnecessary, while the remainder may be partly transferred 
to the care of the several Provinces, and partly maintained at a much 
less expence. The illicit Trade with the French and Spaniards will be 
intercepted by our Traders in their passage; the Indians will be pre- 
vented from incursions into the back settlements, precise and definite 
boundaries will be put to the old Colonies; the Trade and Manufac- 
tures of Great Britain will be extended into the remotest Indian Na- 
tions; and such posts only will require to be garrisoned as command 
the different Indian communications or the intercourse between His 
Majesty's different Colonies by the great Rivers and Lakes. 

These were the ideas that inspired Shelbume's communica- 
tion of October 5, 1767, to the Board of Trade, wherein he out- 
lined the scope of his Western policy. 29 He pointed out that 
the present method of managing Indian affairs was very ex- 
pensive, and that, if the plan proposed by Lord Hillsborough 
in 1764 were now put into execution, this expense' would be 
increased ; and he intimated that the colonials were better able 
to manage these delicate matters than a ministry unfamiliar 
with the nature of the Indians. He recommended, therefore, that 
the British Government renounce the attempt to centralize the 
management of the Indian trade, and place it in the control of the 
colonies, as was the case a decade' before. 

His other recommendation reminds us of Franklin's plan to 
cut up the whole West into colonies. 30 Shelburne desired that 
three new colonies be formed at this time: one at the mouth 
of the Ohio, one at Detroit, and the third at the Illinois. This 
plan proposed the immediate purchase from the Indians of 
territory west of the boundary line, which was according to Shel- 
burne 's plan to be made the western boundary of the Eastern 
colonies. The policy received the support of Secretary Conway, 



n N. Y. Colon. Docs., vii, p. 981. 

*° Smyth, Writings of Franklin, iv, p. 70. 

r 177 1 



Wisconsin Historical Society 

and it was expected that the members of the Board of Trade 
could be persuaded to recommend it. 31 

Before the Board of Trade could make any recommendation 
concerning these proposals, changes in the ministry occurred, 
which withdrew the management of colonial affairs from Shel- 
burne's hands. For many months negotiations had been con- 
ducted by the Duke of Grafton, who was selected as head of 
the proposed new combination, although the Earl of Chatham 
still retained his position in the ministry. After the failure to 
secure the co-operation of other factions, Grafton determined to 
unite with the Bedfords, in spite of their known hostility to the 
American colonies. 32 For two reasons it was determined to di- 
vide the secretaryship of state for the Southern department: 
first, because the duties were too many to be properly performed 
by one man, particularly since colonial affairs had become so im- 
portant ; and secondly, in order to create a new position in 
the cabinet for a friend of the Bedfords. The division of the 
secretaryship into that of the Southern department and that 
of the American colonies was not a new proposal, for it had 
been discussed by the two previous ministries. 33 

'This decision affected Shelburne's department, and the ne- 
gotiations throw some light on the attitude of his colleagues 
toward his colonial policy. The Bedfords, who believed in co- 
ercive measures towards the colonies, desired that Shelburne 
should retain the Southern department and leave to them the 
American affairs. But this did not please the Duke of Grafton, 
who urged Shelburne to take charge of the new department; 
because, he said, "the Bedfords cannot be trusted' with it, on 
account of different principles" and because he (Grafton) was 
well pleased with Shelburne's administration. Shelburne, how- 
ever, preferred to retain charge of European affairs, unless he 
received from the Earl of Chatham an order to the contrary. 



* Id., v, p. 46. 

" Memoirs of Duke of Grafton, pp. 139 et sea.; Bedford Correspond- 
ence (London, 1842-46), iii, pp. 365 et seq.; Walpole, Memoirs of 
George III, iii, pp. 43 et seq. 

"'Ibid, p. 77; Chatham Correspondence, iii, p. 294; Fitzmaurice, Life 
of Lord Shelburne, ii, p. 1; Grenville Papers, iii, p. 235. 



[ 178 



British Western Policy 

On account of ill health, Chatham made no sign. 34 The nego- 
tiations ended, therefore, according to the wish of Shelburne 
and the Bedfords; ana Lord Hillsborough was appointed secre- 
tary of state for the colonies. The policies pursued toward 
the West for the next few years, may be regarded as his. 

Little is known as to what Hillsborough's exact attitude was, 
at the time of his appointment, towards the various American 
problems. We have already seen that he had twice held the pres- 
idency of the Board of Trade, but on neither occasion had 
developed any decided policy. As far as the West was con- 
cerned, he had been ready to carry out Lord Shelburne 's plans. 
So far were his ideas unknown, that there was talk of making 
Benjamin Franklin his under-secretary, to assist him in build- 
ing up the new department. 35 Although Franklin put no 
faith in the ministerial talk, he was very uncertain in regard 
to Hillsborough's plans and did not regard him "in general 
an enemy to America. " 36 It is probable that the choice of 
Hillsborough was made because he was not pledged to violent 
measures toward the American colonies, as were the intimate 
friends of the Duke of Bedford. 37 

Lord Shelburne 's letter of October 5th to the Board of 
Trade had forced the issue of the West upon the ministry. 
The object of Shelburne 's plan had been so concealed in the 
proclamation of 1763 that few had understood it; but now its 
full scope was disclosed, and a careful consideration and a de- 
cision thereon was expected from the ministry. 

The question of the management of the trade was financial 
in character and', since economy was the talk of all ministers, 
the recommendation to transfer the burden of this department 
of Indian affairs to the colonies met with no opposition. The 
utility of erecting colonies in the far West was, however, open 
to dispute, at least it so appeared to many men of that time. 



"These negotiations may be found in Chatham Correspondence, 111, 
p. 297, and in Fitzmaurice, Life of Shelburne, ii, pp. 68 et seq. They 
are not mentioned in Memoirs of Grafton. See also account in Wal- 
pole, Memoirs of George III, ill, p. 98. 

" Smyth, Writings of Franklin, v, p. 90. 

-Ibid, pp. 91, 143 et seq. 

w At least the conversation of Grafton with Shelburne, referred to 
above, would give ground for such a belief. 

[179] 



Wisconsin Historical Society 

To them such a course seemed of little commercial value to the 
mother country, since the new colonies would be situated so 
far from the sea-coast; it would be likely to arouse another 
Indian war, at a time that it was expected the boundary lines 
would satisfy the Indians; it did not appear necessary, so long 
as the colonies remained uncrowded; it would destroy the fur- 
trade, which had not proved as valuable' as was anticipated in 
1763 ; finally, the expense of such enterprises would be great. 88 

The answer of the Board of Trade to Lord Shelburne's 
recommendations, dated March 7, 1768, 39 , was undoubtedly in- 
spired by Lord Hillsborough. There was substantial agree- 
ment with the recommendation concerning the transference of 
the management of the trade to the colonies; but the lord's of 
trade did not think it wise to abolish altogether the offices of 
superintendents of the Indians^ since there were several func- 
tions that could best be executed by the British government — 
such as the purchase' of land, the making of treaties, and gen- 
eral oversight over the interests of the Indians. It was, there- 
fore, determined to continue these offices. 

The Board of Trade did not misunderstand' the significance 
of Shelburne's policy concerning colonies in the far West. 
They wrote : 

The Proposition of forming inland Colonies in America is, we 
humbly conceive, entirely new; it adopts principles in respect to 
American Settlement different from what has hitherto been the 
policy of this Kingdom ; and leads to a system which if pursued through 
all its consequences, is in the present state of this Country of the 
greatest importance. 

The scope of this new policy was revealed to them by the 
arguments advanced "by the authors of the' proposals them- 
selves," to be nothing less than "the entire possession and peo- 
pling of all the Country which has Communication with the 



38 See the various arguments in the Board of Trade Report, March 7, 
1768, in N. Y. Colon. Docs., viii, p. 27, and the opinions of General Gage 
in Doc. Hist, of N. Y., ii, pp. 835 et seg.; also Gage to Shelburne, 
"Board of Trade Papers," Pa. Hist. Society, Jan. 17 and Feb. 22, 1767. 
The last objection appealed strongly to Hillsborough — see letter to 
Gage, April 10, 1768, Mil. Cor., Series Amer. and West Indies, vol. 124, 
Public Record Office. 

88 Printed in N. Y. Colon. Docs., vii, p. 19. 

[180 1 



British Western Policy 

Rivers Mississippi and St. Lawrence." This was the issue be- 
fore the Board of Trade and the new secretary of the colonies. 
After setting forth the reasons, which have' already been in- 
dicated, the report opposed the recommendation of Lord' Shel- 
burne, and his broad-gauged policy was rejected. 

It would be a mistake to intepret this action as indicating 
a final purpose on the part of the ministry to maintain a large 
Indian reservation in the heart of America. Two years later, 
Lord Hillsborough was still in doubt in regard to the final dis- 
position of this vast West. In a most illuminating letter to 
General Gage, in which the secretary exposes his most secret 
thoughts, he writes: 40 

The commerical advantages which may be derived from these pos- 
sessions and the near relation they bear to the safety and security of 
His Majesty's North American Dominions in general under them are 
an object deserving the most serious attention but the great difficulty 
lies in suggesting a proper plan for the improvement of them to these 
ends that will not either be attended with an Expense too heavy for 
the State to bear, or otherwise liable to very great objections. 

After stating the arguments for and against posts and colon- 
ies west of the Indian boundary line, he sums up his own state 
of mind in these words: 

In the meantime from what I have said you will see, that though I 
am fully aware of the propriety of some possession on the Mississippi 
that should have the effect to secure the Commerce and mark the 
Dominion of the Country which belongs to his Majesty on the East 
side of it; yet nevertheless the only two methods of obtaining this 
object are each of them accompanied with such objections as leave my 
judgement in a state of perplexity I am not able to get over. 

In closing it is necessary to call attention to the difficul- 
ties confronting the ministry over the disposal of the land 
on the south of the Ohio and outside of Pennsylvania, that 
had been opened up for colonization by the establishment of 
the Indian boundary line. According to the opinion of the 
Board of Trade, this belonged to Virginia by her charter 
rights ; and already surveys had' been made there for the Vir- 



*°Amer. and West Indies, vol. 114, July 31, 1770, Public Record Of- 
fice. 

[181] 



Wisconsin Historical Society 

ginia soldiers of the French and Indian War. 41 There were, 
however, other possible means of disposing of it. The old Ohio 
Company began immediately to put forth its claims. The 
merchants, who had suffered during the Pontiac War, and had 
been reimbursed by a concession of land by the Indians at the 
treaty of Fort Stanwix, also set forth their claims. The Mis- 
sissippi Company, of Virginia, having failed to obtain terri- 
tory for the establishment of a colony on the Mississippi, ap- 
plied for territory ir this region. The Philadelphia merchants 
associated with Benjamin Franklin, Governor Franklin, and 
Sir William Johnson, immediately formed a new company, 
known by the name of the Walpole Company, and desired per- 
mission to establish a colony there also. 42. 

Here were, indeed, a plenty of claimants. But among them 
all, Lord Hillsborough and his colleagues favored the Phila- 
delphians and gave them every encouragement. Several rea- 
sons for the establishment of a new colony in this corner of 
the West appealed to the ministry. It would promote law and 
order among the' disorderly crowd of the frontier ; it would 
prevent encroachments on the Indian lands; it would settle 
once for all the question of the western boundaries of the sea- 
board colonies. Therefore the ministry, under the influence 



41 In the Report of the Board of Trade of March 7, 1767, occurs 
the following: "Your Majesty will be pleased to observe that altho 
on the one hand the Settlements in the new established Colonies to 
the South are confined to very narrow limits; yet on the other hand 
the middle Colonies (whose state of population requires a greater ex- 
tent) have room to spread much beyond what they have hitherto 
been allowed and that upon the whole one uniform and complete line 
will be formed between the Indians and those antient Colonies, whose 
limits not being confined to the Westward has occasioned that ex- 
tensive settlement" etc. An examination of the correspondence of the 
period has led one to believe that it was not generally thought at this 
time that the Indian boundary line marked the western limits of the 
colonies. 

u For these various schemes see Alden, New Governments. A dis- 
cussion of some of the rights of the rival claimants may be found In 
Plain Facts (Philadelphia, 1781), a pamphlet issued by Samuel 
Wharton in 1781. 



[182] 



British Western Policy 



of Hillsborough, were ready to promote such an establish- 
ment. 43 

In the next few years, the disposal of this land on the upper 
Ohio became one of the paramount issues in the Western policy 
of the ministry. Conditions then arose that made Hillsborough 
change his mind; and he wrote his famous report opposing all 
colonies west of the Alleghanies, which has misled so many into 
believing that he and all ministries of which he was a member 
were at all times opposed to westward' expansion. 44 But this 
whole question must be postponed for discussion in another pap er 
on the Western policy of the British Ministry that led to the 
Quebec Act. 



"The discussion of this point lies outside the subject of this paper; 
but a study of the correspondence of the period has led me to the 
belief that Arthur Lee was correct in his interpretation of the min- 
isterial policy, when he wrote: "Lord Hillsborough was then lord of 
trade. Frequent conversations with him convinced me that the min- 
istry were fixed in prosecuting their American plan, and were de- 
termined to make such alterations in the colonial governments, as 
should accommodate them to the new system of parliamentary power. 
A government west of the Alleghany mountains was to be constituted 
on this new ministerial model, under the name of Vandalia." — Lee, Life 
of Arthur Lee (Boston, 1829), i, p. 246. See also Alden, New Govern- 
ments, p. 44. It is possible that the ministry in adopting this policy 
had in mind Shelburne's arguments for his Western policy, particularly 
the financial one wherein he pointed out the means of raising a 
revenue from land grants. The treasury board began at this time to 
take charge of the sale of lands, and the most potent reason for mak- 
ing the large grant to the Walpole Company was the promise of a 
monetary return — see Considerations on the Agreement of the Lords 
Commissioners * * * with the Hon. Thomas Walpole (London, 
1774). 

"Franklin, Settlements on the River Ohio (London, 1772). 



183 ] 



1 •» . ■ 



'of congress 



?7 470 8 



!193 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



011 697 470 8 # 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 





011697 470 8 J 



Jtioilingei 

pH S.5 

Mill Run F03-2193 






LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 




011697 470 8 | 



riolliiiget 

pH S.5 

Mill Run F03-2193 



